Pearson Is NOT “Spying” On Student Tweets, It’s Enlisting Public School Officials To Defend Its Intellectual Property

Bob Braun, an education blogger and former journalist, got ahold of a note from a school superintendent advising parents in the district that a student in NJ had tweeted outside of school hours about a PARCC test he had completed earlier when school was still in session.* (The exact contents of the tweet are unknown now.)

Pearson, a multinational corporation which monitors its brand on Twitter for reputation defense and intellectual property rights violations, saw the tweet and contacted the New Jersey Department of Education which then reached out to the superintendent of the school district where the child attends. Pearson labeled this a “Priority 1 alert” breach of the confidential nature of the test’s contents and the NJDOE instructed the superintendent to have the student remove his tweet and he complied.

Pearson is not “spying” on student tweets, it’s enlisting public school officials — the New Jersey Department of Education — to defend its intellectual property. The latter is worse and a bigger problem.

People need to realize that corporate brands monitor their Twitter mentions. This is a fact and not a new thing; this is how hashtags and searchable Twitter handles work, and this is how successful issue campaigns have been launched against corporate brands in the past. (In 2011, I wanted to force Procter & Gamble to divest monetary and other support for ALEC, which is the right-wing clearinghouse for state legislation like “stand your ground” aka “kill at will with your gun,” parent trigger, and other toxic legislation, etc. So some activists and I used their shareholder meeting hashtag and tweeted embarrassing news reports about P&G’s shameful corporate citizenship, costly lawsuits over metal hip joints, and so forth. Which of course they saw and any shareholders tuning in to the hashtag also saw. And not long after pressure from many much larger activist groups, including perhaps my own small contribution, P&G withdrew from ALEC.)

To observe that Pearson monitors its social media mentions, then jump to the conclusion that monitoring equalsspying, is to miss the point and show that you don’t understand how social media works. Or that you seem unaware that if a student uses his or her real name then much public information about that person is but a few Google searches away. Your misunderstanding undermines any other credible claims you might make about actual student data privacy issues.

Anything that’s tweeted from a public account is open to global eyeballs via a keyword search using Twitter’s search feature. It would be like claiming that someone is “spying” on you because they read what you hashtagged because they too are following that hashtag, keyword, or Twitter handle. You put something out there for the entire world to see, and some of the people in the world are indeed seeing it.

That’s what happened here: Pearson monitors what’s said about it on Twitter for reputation defense and intellectual copyright reasons — they want to minimize cheating on their tests. Yes, then Pearson took the additional step of finding out where, generally, the student went to school — but did the student have this information posted up front on his Twitter account? “Joe Smith, Class of ’16, XYZ High School”? We don’t know, and Bob Braun did not address what information the student had already made publicly available about himself when Braun labeled Pearson’s ability to locate the student’s home school district as spying. But we don’t really need to know, because that’s a red herring.

On its face, this is not a student data privacy issue, but a student free speech issue.

The fact that Pearson monitors its online reputation closely is not a cause for alarm but an avenue for redress.

Push back on Pearson should be because this for-proft company is attempting to make principals and superintendents infringe on free speech rights of students in order to protect Pearson’s property interests, which is a corporate abuse of public school officials.And the NJ DOE is avidly assisting in this effort to pressure local school officials.

The main issues are:

do students have First Amendment free speech rights on social media?**

do students have the right to discuss tests in online forums and networks? If a test question is wrong, poorly framed or written, inaccurate, or otherwise has problematic answers, shouldn’t students be able to raise this issue? They are, due to Pearson’s secrecy rules to protect its IP, one of the few groups of people allowed to see these tests. Parents are not allowed to see them.After all, the stakes are high for students to “do well” on these tests so the test makers *should* have impeccable standards in crafting these questions and answers. Schools can be closed and teachers demoted or even fired in some states because test scores are tied to these practices. And when is it best for students to raise the issue of questionable test questions? (Again, I have no knowledge of the original tweet that precipitated this incident, but nevertheless are we simply supposed to take the quality of Pearson high stakes tests on faith?)

what measures does Pearson, a multi-billion dollar company with business all over the world, take using its own personnel and resources to protect its intellectual property (its tests)? After all, the corporation has the resources to grapple with an inherently leaky social media-saturated world. Maybe in an always-on, global media environment, it’s not possible to deliver standardized testing at such massive scale. (Some would say it’s not desirable either.) That’s for Pearson to figure out. It’s not the job of public school officials to protect Pearson profits — or is it?

what is the role of school principals or superintendents in balancing the free speech rights of students with the pressure from Pearson to act as enforcers or protectors of Pearson’s intellectual property rights?

when does “protection” of Pearson’s IP rights become the government suppression of a student’s free speech when a public school official (a representative of local government) censors students’ undesirable social media postings?

isn’t free speech about tests and their content a necessary check on the quality and integrity of the tests? Tests are not infallible — if we were never to have access to test questions, how would we know how many errors or poorly crafted/ambiguous questions there are? Shouldn’t these always be released after the testing period is over?

Recall that classic First Amendment issues have to do with government’s place in suppressing or censoring the speech that all Americans — even students! — are presumed to have free exercise of.

All of this law is developing as we speak. It’s grey right now and the lack of settled law is disturbing. But even more disturbing is fundamentally misunderstanding what Pearson did wrong.

—————————-

* I suggested that Bob Braun remove the contact information for the superintendent as it isn’t doxxing her per se, but if you truly want outrage to be directed at Pearson, you would redact the unnecessary information and provide Pearson Twitter handles, phone numbers, etc.

In recent years, many people have made the same kind of effort, from actors who don’t want their private photographs in broad circulation to ex-convicts who don’t want their long-ago legal troubles to prevent them from finding jobs. Despite the varied circumstances, all these people want something that does not exist in the United States: the right to be forgotten.

About K12NN Site Admin

I’m Cynthia Liu, Owner/Founder of K12 News Network. I’m the proud product of public schools through post-grad, the mom of a child in public schools, and the daughter of two teachers. Connect with me professionally on LinkedIn.

Comments

I disagree. Pearson is using a third party company out of Utah to use their software to search the social media sites of minors. If it picks up anti parcc chatter it alerts the DOE in NJ. In order for the district to be contacted pearson would have to know identifiable information as to what district this child goes to. another words john doe says something about the parcc, the security company contacts the state. the state has to then identify this person. Also where aliases are being used on social media the software would have to dig deeper to get information to identify this student and cross reference against other databases. So the software could be doing scans of account information or information that is under the privacy setting. any way you look at it identifiable information is being shared about minors to a third party company without parental consent. Also pearson could activate web cams or built in cams to take video or pics of the students. all that information in the child office folder is now being put out there in a database form and being passed between the government, a foreign company and third party company’s. This goes way beyond protecting intellectual property. common core and parcc are all about data mining the kids and using the data to build educational products to sell back to the districts. What they are really looking for is descent and shutting that down. Do we want to live in a society where a company scans our kids conversations and chooses what they think is wrong speech, notifies the government that then uses a database to hunt them down and threaten them with punishment???

Hi Mike,
Here’s the thing: we don’t know, and so far no one has asked the Watchung Hills superintendent, if the student had identifying information on his Twitter handle or the Twitter banner for his account. If you use your real name, and/or put your location or “XXX School, Class of “18” on your public Twitter account, you make it easy for everyone who sees your public tweets to find you.

Now, the problem is Pearson has an overbroad and hair-trigger notion of test security. My piece argues that it’s Pearson’s problem as a business to figure out how to deal with a 24-7 global media environment. It’s not NJDOE’s problem, nor does responsibility lie with NJDOE or parents or students to figure this out. Furthermore, Pearson should only do what it needs to do to stop cheating that stays within the boundaries of free speech rights of parents, students, and educators. Our free speech rights come first.

Pearson operates in many countries on the planet. At any time on earth on any day, a child could be taking a Pearson tests. Is Pearson going to claim that it needs a global “cone of silence” to protect its IP? That’s absurd and you and I know it.

Students’ rights must be protected because they are among the few to see and experience the tests directly. IMHO they have a moral obligation to call out errors, problematic questions or answers, wrong answers, and so on. Their free speech is directly linked to the validity of the tests. Pearson has one job: to write intelligent and valid test questions and answers. If their tests are shoddy then why do we make them so high stakes? Furthermore, teachers and students often make it part of learning to discuss questions answered incorrectly on teacher-generated tests. The fact that Pearson suppresses the natural urge of students to discuss test questions after they’ve taken them shows how little benefit these tests offer to students and how the tests are really set up to be profitable for the testing company.

I don’t think we disagree — I simply think “spying” is a poor frame for what’s going on here.

Better digital literacy from students and parents would help — students can check their privacy settings, parents can give guidance and set ground rules for their children using devices that parents pay for.

Finally, I hope all parents concerned about data mining — a different, though related issue to student monitoring — are not also allowing their children younger than age 13 to be on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc, in defiance of COPPA laws that are there to prevent use of these social networks by minors. Because if you’re yelling about school or third party vendors using data mining in school district tests, but let your 10 year old kid roam free on Facebook with his own profile, then you need to educate yourself on the data mining that Facebook does. It’s everywhere. Do I approve of it? No, but I also don’t let my 11-year old have a Youtube channel. Don’t give away what companies want but have no business mining.

Federal Policy

There are twenty-three candidates running to fill former Congressman Xavier Bacerra’s seat in Congressional District 34 in Southern California. (Bacerra is currently the state’s Attorney General, replacing Kamala Harris, who, after November 8, 2016, became our US Senator.) Election Day is Tuesday, April 4, 2017, 7:00 am to 8:00 pm. You can find your polling […]

Take the pledge to #resist and fight for public schools as a public good TODAY. DeVos had to have the assistance of Vice President Mike Pence’s unprecedented tie-breaking vote in order to win her confirmation. Two GOP Senators voted against, all Democratic Senators voted against. Yet all the other GOP Senators who received campaign donations […]

The next #DemDebate is scheduled for the important primary state of Iowa on November 14, 2015. It’ll be broadcast by CBS in partnership with the Des Moines Register. Professor Julian Vasquez Heilig is leading the call for the families of 50 million students K-12 across the nation and the communities they live in to have […]